Godolphin Australia Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State RevenueCitation:[2024] HCA 20Before:Gageler CJ, Gordon, Edelman, Steward, Jagot JJDate:05 Jun 2024Case Number:S130/2023Read more
The Court held that the dominant use requirement in s 10AA(3)(b) applies to the composite phrase, meaning the land must be dominantly used for the maintenance of animals for the purpose of sale, not merely for maintenance of animals alone.
- Parties
- Applicant: Unknown Applicant; Respondent: Unknown Respondent
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 05 June 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Statutory Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Land Tax, Statutory Exemption, Primary Production, Statutory Interpretation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Unknown Applicant
Applicant
Unknown Respondent
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Statutory Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the dominant use requirement in s 10AA(3)(b) of the Land Tax Management Act 1956 (NSW) applies to both the maintenance of animals and the purpose of sale.
- 2 Whether 'dominant' qualifies only the use of land or the composite 'use-for-a-purpose' phrase.
Ratio Decidendi
The Court held that the dominant use requirement in s 10AA(3)(b) applies to the composite phrase, meaning the land must be dominantly used for the maintenance of animals for the purpose of sale, not merely for maintenance of animals alone.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- The exemption under s 10AA(1) is not available to the applicant.
- Applicant to pay costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment